Singapore should withdraw Interpol Notification, premised upon Romanian Government agreement that Ionescu NOT be allowed to leave home AND Romania cooperate fully under the terms of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR) to bring Ionescu to justice.
Yes, sorry to say this, but by my current reading of the VCDR, I believe the Singapore issued Interpol Arrest request for Ionescu is premature, contentious and without further review, risk derailing the entire negotiatory process with Romania.
Ionescu of course, with his cunning, has verily manipulated this unfortunate 'situation of suspense' to his personal advantage, stymieing the entire diplomatic-legal process with his incessant verbiage and antics both in print and in court.
To start, I believe Singapore's use of Article 39.2 (appended forth):
to be premature and inappropriate.
The most important part of the VCDR, the preamble is contained in the document's very first paragraph. Likewise, I accept the validity of every subsequent article, only as hinging upon the consideration of those aforementioned (in the spirit of the law of course- there is an order to every written law).
For example, Article 2, the very first and a 'foundational' article states:
Likewise, without the satisfaction of A2, little if any recourse, nor reference, to the terms of agreement via the VCDR can be established (pre-determined mutual agreements of the contrary excepted).
Given the following ('all encompassing') articles of precedence- Articles 31.1 and 31.4 (appended as follows):
(A31.4 itself being recourse to A31.1)
I consider A39.2 to be applicable only as a recourse, conditional upon the failure of the sending state, to perform its side of the deal in upholding justice as defined in the mutual agreements in accordance to the spirit of the VCDR A31.4.
The application of A39.2 is thus only appropriate with adequate evidence to the contrary of A31.4 being fulfilled and Singapore in its haste, has failed in this respect.
The ill-conceived and premature raising of the Interpol warrant of arrest is presumptuous and thus accusatory of Romanian refusal to perform its responsibilities in accordance to A31.4, a suggestion much liable to cause offense and confusion at diplomatic levels of discourse.
That said, Singapore should put forward the following requests to Romania whilst retracting the Interpol warrant of arrest AND ensure the following:
1) Romania distance itself from all ionescu press comments thus far.
2) That Romania WARN Ionescu that in so far as he maintains his status as a Romanian diplomat (as thus protection from extradition to Singapore in accordance to Article39.2), he should 'behave the part' becoming of a 'diplomat' i.e. NOT doing anything to harm the mutual relations between 2 countries and abiding by the interests and instructions of the Sovereign whom you are representing NOR interfere in any way, in person or proxy with the accident investigations. Any aggravated exceptions to this instruction may be tantamount to a grave dereliction of diplomatic duties/ even sedition and would be taken into consideration during prosecution for a strong deterrent sentences the crimes a fore committed.
3) That Romania take adequate measures to ensure the custody of Ionescu prior to his sentencing and make adequate measures to ensure that justice is served.
May the Interpol warrant of arrest NOT remain a hindrance to our mutual relations. May Ionescu see the Justice he so deserves.
May God help us all.
Your queries and comments are welcomed.
May God bless and do have a nice day.
.
=============================
| 19:55 | 25/04/2010 Silviu Ionescu sues the state of Singapore Romania's former attaché in Singapore, Silviu Ionescu filed on Friday, at the Bucharest Court of Appeals, a criminal lawsuit against the state of Singapore, seeking the cancellation of the international arrest warrant issued against him in Singapore, in the case of the accident that led to the death of a Singaporean in December 2009, Mediafax reports. According to Silviu Ionescu, the authorities of the Asian state knew the warrant is illegal to begin with, and this is why they sent to Romanian authorities the result of the investigation they conducted in Singapore, which demonstrates that they acknowledge the competence of Romanian Justice to issue a verdict in this case. He added that the existence of the arrest warrant, though rejected by Romanian authorities on legal grounds, puts him under stress and damages his image in Romania and abroad, and it was both unnecessary and illegal to issue the warrant at this moment. |
Ionescu of course, with his cunning, has verily manipulated this unfortunate 'situation of suspense' to his personal advantage, stymieing the entire diplomatic-legal process with his incessant verbiage and antics both in print and in court.
To start, I believe Singapore's use of Article 39.2 (appended forth):
Quote:
| A39.2: "When the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the country..." |
The most important part of the VCDR, the preamble is contained in the document's very first paragraph. Likewise, I accept the validity of every subsequent article, only as hinging upon the consideration of those aforementioned (in the spirit of the law of course- there is an order to every written law).
For example, Article 2, the very first and a 'foundational' article states:
Quote:
| A2: "The establishment of diplomatic relations between States, and of permanent diplomatic missions, takes place by mutual consent." |
Given the following ('all encompassing') articles of precedence- Articles 31.1 and 31.4 (appended as follows):
Quote:
| - A31.1 states: "A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. ..." - A31.4 states: "The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt him from the jurisdiction of the sending State." |
I consider A39.2 to be applicable only as a recourse, conditional upon the failure of the sending state, to perform its side of the deal in upholding justice as defined in the mutual agreements in accordance to the spirit of the VCDR A31.4.
The application of A39.2 is thus only appropriate with adequate evidence to the contrary of A31.4 being fulfilled and Singapore in its haste, has failed in this respect.
The ill-conceived and premature raising of the Interpol warrant of arrest is presumptuous and thus accusatory of Romanian refusal to perform its responsibilities in accordance to A31.4, a suggestion much liable to cause offense and confusion at diplomatic levels of discourse.
That said, Singapore should put forward the following requests to Romania whilst retracting the Interpol warrant of arrest AND ensure the following:
1) Romania distance itself from all ionescu press comments thus far.
2) That Romania WARN Ionescu that in so far as he maintains his status as a Romanian diplomat (as thus protection from extradition to Singapore in accordance to Article39.2), he should 'behave the part' becoming of a 'diplomat' i.e. NOT doing anything to harm the mutual relations between 2 countries and abiding by the interests and instructions of the Sovereign whom you are representing NOR interfere in any way, in person or proxy with the accident investigations. Any aggravated exceptions to this instruction may be tantamount to a grave dereliction of diplomatic duties/ even sedition and would be taken into consideration during prosecution for a strong deterrent sentences the crimes a fore committed.
3) That Romania take adequate measures to ensure the custody of Ionescu prior to his sentencing and make adequate measures to ensure that justice is served.
May the Interpol warrant of arrest NOT remain a hindrance to our mutual relations. May Ionescu see the Justice he so deserves.
May God help us all.
Your queries and comments are welcomed.
May God bless and do have a nice day.
.=============================
This message has been posted/ reflected at the following forums:
A1forum:
07May2010: Ex-envoy (Doctor of Dispicable Crimes) Ionescu not protected by immunity, with discrete mention at:
08May2010: Romanian Embassy Diplomatic Car Hit & Run
08May2010: Nothing diplomatic about this immunity
08May2010: Nothing diplomatic about this immunity
HWZ:
07May2010: Romanian diplomat Ionescu was the driver in fatal hit-and-run; with discrete mention at:
07May2010:Possible consequences on Singapore-Romania relations: analysts
SG forums:
SBoy:
07May2010: ROMANIA Tells Singapore Garment To "** **** ********". And They Are Correct!
09May2010: Romania jailed Dracula Ionescu for 29 days! 3 Cheeers for Mr George Yeo & GMS
09May2010: Romania jailed Dracula Ionescu for 29 days! 3 Cheeers for Mr George Yeo & GMS
CNA:
07May2010: Interpol Red Notice of arrest against Silviu Ionescu suspen
09May2010: convict silviu ionescu should be given 29 strokes of ROTAN
09May2010: convict silviu ionescu should be given 29 strokes of ROTAN
T Review:
08May2010: Ionescu to appeal to Romanian High Court to cancel arrest warrant
No comments:
Post a Comment